[Fast Moving Angel]

I wonder why they used the term “at fertilization” instead of “at conception”. To further dehumanize the fetus, maybe?

[Neidermeyer]

I wonder why they used the term “at fertilization” instead of “at conception”. To further dehumanize the fetus, maybe?
***********************************************
I’m all for keeping it as scientific and truthful as possible , the word choice was probably to short circuit those who claim that pregnancy doesn’t begin until implantation and to deny them the fig leaf of a worthless argument splitting the differences that would have allowed the continuation of fertility centers and others creating dozens of earliest stage human beings 90% of which they fully intend to discard. Science is against Roe , there is no reason to be afraid , use the truth as our ultimate weapon.

[sarasmom]

Perhaps to enhance the humanization of “fertilized eggs”?

As it stands now, some people now are comfortable aborting babies in an ill defined fetal stage of development.
And it seems many are comfortable “harvesting” eggs from female ovaries, as if they were donating blood, or hair.

Currently, popular opinions about female emancipation from second class human status is dependent on women pretending our reproductive systems are “equal” to males, and unworthy of different societal protections.

Females are born with a finite number of eggs.
Males continuously manufacture short lived sperm cells.

Rather than killing human babies, it would seem more logical to seek to limit unwanted male sperm from coming into contact with female egg ovulation.

Oh gee, we circle right back to an ethical and morality based concept of men controlling their sperm spreading instincts, versus women going against nature and killing their babies.